4 ms·
Surely bloggers do not only always outperform Wall Street analysts, but there are certainly scenarios, such as this one, where they do get it right. I agree tha
by virincognito 16y ago
Surely bloggers do not only always outperform Wall Street analysts, but there are certainly scenarios, such as this one, where they do get it right. I agree that CNN's sample size could be statistically inaccurate, but the blogosphere is pretty difficult to measure.
I think the point of the article is that the number of individual investors is growing, and since there is such a plethora of information out there and easy channels to share opinions, the financial sphere is rapidly evolving online.
- hugh3 16y agoSurely bloggers do not only always outperform Wall Street analysts, but there are certainly scenarios, such as this one, where they do get it right. s/bloggers/chickens/ Seriously, if I have a bunch of chickens pecking at labelled buttons to predict corporate profits and I only bother to report those cases where they happen to be right then my chickens are gonna come out looking pretty good as well.
- virincognito 16y agoI think you're missing the point. The argument isn't that bloggers as a whole perform better than professional analysts, it's that there are far more sources to get information about the market these days than just Wall Street analysts. Bloggers are one of them, and there are times that they are right. Some blogs are about as reliable as pecking chickens, but some spend considerable time researching and developing solid insights. Generalizing and discounting every single one is a bit rash.
- hugh3 16y agoBut unless there's someone whose advice is reliably better than the market, then merely knowing that some people are better some of the time isn't useful information.